HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The 1st defendant in O.S.No.436 of 2000 who was successful in getting the suit filed by the plaintiff for declaration and injunction, dismissed upon its reversal by the lower appellate Court has come up with this second appeal.
(2.) The suit was originally filed by the plaintiff / appellant seeking a declaration of his title on the following pleadings:
The suit properties belonged to Muthusamy Gounder by virtue of his purchase on 12.08.1968. It is pleaded that the said Muthusamy Gounder got married and went to Malaysia along with his wife Chellammal and only male child viz., the 2nd defendant Sengodan. He was in Malaysia till 1954 where he begot two sons namely Sholi and 5th defendant Kaliannan and one daughter Veerammal, 7th defendanat. The said Muthusamy Gounder returned India in the year 1954 and purchased a house and certain agricultural lands in Kalappanayakkanpatti village and again went back to Malaysia and returned in 1957. Thereafter, he purchased the suit property on 12.08.1968 out of his own income. On 26.10.1973, the said Muthusamy Gounder settled the suit properties to his grandson, through the 5th defendant Kaliannan namely Mani @ Balasubramanian, appointing his wife Chellammal as his guardian. The settlee namely Mani @ Balasubramanian died on 12.01.1977 leaving behind his mother Pappathi, the 6th defendant in the suit as his only legal heir. The plaintiff purchased the suit property from the said Pappathi under a Sale Deed dated 26.11.1993. Therefore, the plaintiff would seek a declaration of title and permanent injunction.
(3.) The suit was resisted by the defendants contending that the suit properties are not absolute properties of Muthusamy Gounder and he had no
power to settle the same on minor Mani @ Balasubramanian. It was also
contended that the 1st defendant herein had filed a suit in O.S.No.323 of 1986
on the file of the Subordinate Court, Namakkal for partition and separate
possession of the share in the suit property in which exparte preliminary
decree came to be passed on 24.08.1992. Thereafter, the suit was transferred
to the District Munsif Court, Namkkal and renumbered as O.S.No.380 of 1998.
In I.A.No.622 of 1998, a exparte final decree was also passed on 18.08.2000.
Therefore, according to the defendants, the plaintiff being a lis pendens
purchaser is not entitled to claim declaration of tile and injunction.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.